Sujet : Re: cpu-x
De : ldo (at) *nospam* nz.invalid (Lawrence D'Oliveiro)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.advocacyDate : 15. May 2024, 07:45:03
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v21i4u$msd2$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
User-Agent : Pan/0.155 (Kherson; fc5a80b8)
On 14 May 2024 01:02:56 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
On Tue, 14 May 2024 00:42:29 +0000, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On 14 May 2024 00:11:11 GMT, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
So, it would be beneficial to open-source developers to make sure that
their software breaks easily and crashes, so as to sell the support.
Clearly you have never used the stuff.
No, actually, you are depending crucially on it right now, without
realizing it. Without Open Source, there would be no Internet.
We both know that's not true. Without open-source, there would have been
an alternative based on UNIX or Windows.
Those alternatives existed, way back when. Before the Internet, there were
“online services” such as Compuserve, AOL, Prodigy and others. Before the
World-Wide Web came to dominate, and in competition with it, there was
Microsoft’s “Project Blackbird”, Quark’s “Immedia” and no doubt something
from Adobe as well.
(Are these names unfamiliar to you? Go look them up in the usual places.
There will be a test--if you want to continue this thread.)
Linux is chosen because it's
good enough and free, not because it is necessarily better.
Open Source was better than all of those put together. That’s why it wiped
them out. Those proprietary products had the backing (financial,
marketing, technical) of some of the world’s biggest megacorporations of
the time, but they could not compete with Open Source and open standards.